restore our future – OpenSecrets Newshttps://www.opensecrets.org/news
Breaking news, original reporting, and investigative journalism *on money in politics from the Center for Responsive PoliticsMon, 21 Jan 2019 17:07:24 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.8How Much Does Lobbyist Money Matter To Outside Groups?https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/03/lobbyist-money-outside-groups/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/03/lobbyist-money-outside-groups/#respondFri, 08 Mar 2013 15:34:27 +0000Organizing for Action, the new group put together by top Obama campaign aides to carry on where his campaign finished, has promised to be a new type of politically active nonprofit. Like the Obama campaign, OFA has said it will not take money from federally registered lobbyists. While limiting the role that registered lobbyists play in political fundraising efforts might seem to be an effective way to curb the influence of "special interests," we wondered how important lobbyists really are in the outside money game. Are their donations to super PACs and other post-Citizens United groups like OFA really over the top?

Organizing for Action, the new group put together by top Obama campaign aides to carry on where his campaign finished, has promised to be a new type of politically active nonprofit. Unlike most other groups organized under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code — which have no obligation to disclose their donors, and which we often refer to as “shadow money groups” — OFA says it will provide a quarterly list of who has given more than $250 to the group, and say exactly how much they’ve donated.

Also, OFA, unlike those other nonprofits, has imposed restrictions on its sources of funding: It has pledged not to take money from foreign donors or from corporations (though it will accept contributions from labor unions). And, like the Obama campaign, OFA has said it will not take money from federally registered lobbyists.

While limiting the role that registered lobbyists play in political fundraising efforts might seem to be an effective way to curb the influence of “special interests,” we wondered how important lobbyists really are in the outside money game. Are their donations to super PACs and other post-Citizens United groups like OFA really over the top?

In the 2012 cycle, super PACs raised $838 million. But according to a CRP analysis, donations from registered lobbyists to super PACs amounted to just $837,000, or less than one-tenth of one percent of all super PAC money. We don’t know how much money registered lobbyists may have given to nondisclosing nonprofits, for obvious reasons.

Lobbyists’ contributions to political campaigns have traditionally been more of an issue because of limits on donations to candidates. A lobbyist can give as much as any other individual — for any one candidate, $2,600 for the primary and the same for the general election — but if the lobbyist represents a corporation, and if that corporation’s employees and PAC are also giving, the lobbyist’s contributions are a useful way to extend a company’s ability to make an impact with a candidate.

In contrast, there’s no limit on how much can be given to a super PAC or 501(c) organization. Enter the billionaires, who play in a league that most lobbyists can’t hope to join. The men and women of K Street, while they make a very good living, simply don’t have the resources to make the massive contributions that were seen in the last campaign cycle.

For example, the biggest donor to outside groups from the world of registered lobbyists was C. Boyden Gray — a former White House counsel who was closely aligned with the Romney campaign. He gave $225,000 to four different conservative super PACs, including $100,000 to Restore Our Future, the super PAC that backed Romney. Only one other lobbyist gave six figures to any outside spending group: Democratic lobbyist Andrew L. Woods, who gave $100,000 to Majority PAC, the super PAC that supported Senate Democrats. The donations by Gray and Woods are sizable sums, but not enough, in either case, to warrant a spot on our list of top 100 donors to outside groups in 2012.

Most lobbyists’ contributions to outside groups would be a rounding error for many of the most active super PACs. The median gift from this group was $1,000 in 2012.

OFA’s ban on accepting money from registered lobbyists may have symbolic value, but it’s unlikely that the rule shuts the door on any signficant contributions.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/03/lobbyist-money-outside-groups/feed/0Major GOP Donor Hires Lobbyist While Federal Investigation Continueshttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/01/major-gop-donor-hires-lobbyist-while-federal-investigation-continues/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/01/major-gop-donor-hires-lobbyist-while-federal-investigation-continues/#respondThu, 31 Jan 2013 12:02:00 +0000Gary Morse's the Villages, one of the world's largest retirement communities, hires a federal lobbyist in connection with the very issue for which the company is under investigation by the IRS. But he's unlikely to have trouble opening doors among Republican lawmakers.

]]>One of the Republican Party’s biggest donors — a Florida real estate developer who apparently is facing a federal investigation over the use of special tax districts for his retirement complex — hired a lobbyist in the last quarter of 2012 for the purpose of “contacting the federal government” about the districts.

The Villages, owned by developer H. Gary Morse and his family, had not previously hired a lobbyist at the federal level, according to OpenSecrets.org records. But the new lobbying report shows that it paid $30,000 during the quarter to Cardenas Partners, led by Al Cardenas, the Cuban-born two-time chairman of the Florida Republican Party. Cardenas has done state-level work in the past for the Villages.

An overwhelmingly white, mostly Republican retirement community 90 miles north and inland from Tampa Bay, the Villages cuts through parts of three counties. Sometimes referred to as Disneyland for retirees, it includes dozens of golf courses and about 50,000 homes.

It’s also known for being an insular community where Morse is the chief orchestrator. Morse controls not only the larger corporation but has created many spinoff companies that handle aspects of life at the Villages — trash pickup, for example, and utilities, as well as investment firms and banks.

Morse’s wealth — he and his family are worth billions, according to Bloomberg — is due in part to his use of special tax districts to fund the Villages’ expansion. The districts, created under state law, sell bonds that are exempt from federal income tax, and some of the proceeds are used to buy amenities and services from Morse.

But sale of the bonds is supposed to perform a “wholly public purpose,” according to the IRS, and the special districts have been controversial, with many in the state believing that many millions of taxpayer dollars have been wrongly flowing to developers such as Morse.

Morse’s special tax districts have been under investigation by the IRS since at least 2009, when the agency wrote to the Villages saying it believed that bonds issued by one of the development’s special districts overpaid Morse for golf courses and other structures, according to Bloomberg, and that some of the assets it bought from the developer weren’t eligible to be purchased with tax-exempt bonds. While the IRS won’t comment on investigations of taxpayers, legal documents indicate that the inquiry was ongoing as of last May.

All is not rosy at the state level, either. Florida’s Republican governor, Rick Scott, issued an executive order last year ordering an investigation of the use of the special tax districts statewide.

Morse’s spokesperson, Gary Lester, did not return calls seeking comment, and it’s unclear why he hired a lobbyist to discuss the special tax districts in the halls of Congress.

But he’s unlikely to need much help opening doors on Capitol Hill, at least on the Republican side. Contributions from Morse and his family, his companies and their employees to federal GOP candidates and committees over the past several election cycles have been prolific. Morse and his wife have given $2.2 million since 1999, according to OpenSecrets.org research. And his children and their spouses have given another $2.1 million. Employees of the Villages and related companies? Add another $2.7 million.

And then there are the companies themselves. In 2012, Morse took advantage of recent developments in campaign finance law — including the 2010 Citizens United decision — and used the Villages and related corporations to bolster the finances of two key Republican super PACs. The companies — many of which were started to provide services at the retirement complex, such as Central Sumter Utility Co. LLC, Sumter Sanitation LLC and Mid-Florida Properties LLC — contributed $385,000 to Karl Rove’s American Crossroads last year, and $1 million to the pro-Romney super PAC, Restore Our Future.

Individuals (including Morse and his family) and corporations who listed the Villages’ main address — 1020 Lake Sumter Landing — as their address on reports to the Federal Election Commission donated $2.4 million in the 2012 election cycle alone to candidates, leadership PACs and super PACs.

Not only that, but Morse offered his yacht, the Cracker Bay — which was flying the flag of the Cayman Islands — for a party during the GOP convention feting bundlers who had put together $1 million or more for Mitt Romney.

And, not to neglect state politics, just a couple of months after Scott ordered a study of the special tax districts, Morse, his three children and the Villages itself donated a total of $180,000 to Let’s Get to Work, a committee Scott “supports.” The study is about a year from completion, state officials told OpenSecrets.org.

Researchers Mark Mullaney and Robert Maguire contributed to this story.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/01/major-gop-donor-hires-lobbyist-while-federal-investigation-continues/feed/0Obama’s Shadow Money Allies File First Reporthttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/01/obamas-shadow-money-allie/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/01/obamas-shadow-money-allie/#respondTue, 08 Jan 2013 11:17:37 +0000The tax return of the nonprofit linked to the main pro-Obama super PAC shows links to other liberal groups and more payments to Paul Begala. What it doesn't show is donors' names.

This story is part of an exclusive series about the funding behind politically active tax-exempt organizations that don’t disclose their donors. You can read the other stories in the series here.

Priorities USA Action, the super PAC started by two former aides to President Barack Obama, never matched the eye-popping revenues of its conservative counterparts, Restore Our Future and American Crossroads. Those two groups raised more than $300 million combined in the 2012 election cycle.

But after Obama dropped his initial reluctance to support Priorities (or any super PAC) and gave his quiet blessing to the group, Priorities’ contributions picked up. By Election Day it had raised more than $66 million from unions and wealthy liberal donors, whose names had to be disclosed to the Federal Election Commission.

Not so for the donors to Priorities’ 501(c)(4) sister outfit, called simply Priorities USA. It and similar tax-exempt organizations are supposed to be “social welfare” groups that engage in only limited politicking and file reports just once a year, with the IRS. And though they must give the names of their top benefactors to the tax agency, they can keep them secret from the public.

Priorities files first 990

Priorities has made only one such tax filing, which was obtained by the Center for Responsive Politics. Covering the first eight months of the group’s existence in 2011, the form’s Schedule B shows that Priorities had revenues of almost $2.3 million from only five donors.

One donor alone gave more than 80 percent of Priorities’ total revenue in 2011, or $1.9 million of about $2.3 million. The next largest contributions were much lower, $250,000 and $50,000.

Whether the donors were corporations, individuals, unions or other nonprofits that also don’t have to disclose their donors is impossible to know from the form.

Priorities USA described the bulk of its activities as “direct advocacy of public policies that advantage the middle class,” pointing specifically to production of “two video advertisements that aired on Priorities USA’s website…and on YouTube on the issue of Pell Grants and tax rates.” These ads — which cost the organization more than $722,000 — are 30-second spots that apparently never were aired on TV and boasted only modest views on the group’s YouTube page.

The most viewed ad, clocking in at more than 50,000 views, is a mock news report that uses a clip of Ronald Reagan to suggest that the former Republican president wouldn’t be on board with current GOP tax policy. It closes with the question, “Ronald Reagan supported millionaires paying their fair share. Don’t you?”

The other ad, viewed less than 900 times, claims that Republican policies would make college too expensive for many middle class students, then pivots to say that “President Obama has a plan to help.” The ad stops short of calling for any specific action on the part of the viewer; it simply says, “Let’s support our students and our future,” implying that the way to do so was to support Obama.

But Priorities never told the FEC about these ads. Even if they had run on television, they are “issue ads” that must be reported only if they run during certain pre-primary and pre-general election time periods that weren’t applicable in November 2011 when the spots were uploaded.

Asked about the seemingly political nature of the ads, Priorities USA senior strategist and co-founder Bill Burton (left) wrote in an email to OpenSecrets Blog, “Priorities USA works to advance policies that will help middle class families. Access to affordable higher education and a fair tax rate are certainly consistent with that goal.” He went on, “As to why the leadership of the Republican Party has decided that it would gladly sacrifice the best interests of a majority of middle class families to try to protect the privileges of a small economic elite, that is a better question for them than us.”

American Bridge 21st Century

Priorities the super PAC and Priorities the (c)(4) drew some unwanted attention when the super PAC disclosed in a routine FEC report that its sister group had given it $215,000 in 2011. The money went to pay for part of what the latter group owed for shared overhead. But the transfer highlighted that, while super PACs must report their donors, the disclosures don’t always reveal the actual source of the funds.

Priorities USA gave out a single grant in 2011, to American Bridge 21st Century Foundation, another liberal 501(c)(4) connected to a super PAC. Priorities described the $75,000 grant as general support for American Bridge’s advocacy of “[f]ederal policies that will advantage the majority of middle class Americans.”

American Bridge’s super PAC provides opposition research to like-minded liberal groups looking to make negative ads targeting conservative politicians. Unlike most super PACs, it does not spend most of its money directly on independent expenditures. FEC records show that of the $12.4 million raised by the group’s super PAC, only $334,000 was spent on ads opposing Republican candidates. The rest of its funds went for employee salaries and contributions to a network of other liberal groups such as America Votes Action Fund, a super PAC, and Planned Parenthood Action Fund, a nonprofit — totaling $425,000 and $500,000, respectively.

As a recent Frontline documentary showed, many of the operatives employed by American Bridge’s super PAC are either researchers who sit at computers looking for dirt on candidates, or camera-wielding “trackers” shadowing Republican candidates. Both liberal and conservative groups hire trackers to follow candidates and their surrogates on the campaign trail, waiting for inconsistencies or slip-ups to use in negative ads.

The stated mission of American Bridge’s 501(c)(4) arm is vaguely described in the group’s only IRS filing to date: “[T]o compare and contrast progressive and conservative solutions to America’s public policy concerns and to educate the American people and the nation’s leaders on the results of that research.”

The filing lists no details regarding the “social welfare” activities on which 501(c)(4) groups are supposed to focus. The single program it lists is described no more clearly than its overall mission: “The organization advocated and researched progressive solutions to America’s public policy concerns, and worked to educate the American people and the nation’s leaders on progressive ideas.”

A part of the money spent to provide this service — whatever it actually was — came in the form of a $38,000 grant to another liberal 501(c)(4) called ProgressNow — on whose board sits Priorities USA board member Rob McKay, who also chairs the Democracy Allilance, a secretive group of wealthy liberal donors.

When asked, Burton did not comment on the nature of the grant made to American Bridge by Priorities USA.

Begala may not believe, but he receives

In April 2012, Paul Begala referred to the current Supreme Court justices as the Court that “auctioned off democracy in the Citizens United decision.” Later, in a Q&A with the Brown Political Review, Begala said, “I advise the biggest pro-Obama super PAC, and yet I would like to live in a world without super PACs. I’d be happy to work myself out of a job because I think unlimited money is not good for the system.”

Begala’s unemployment would cost him a pretty penny, though. FEC filings show that Begala received well over $400,000 from Priorities USA Action, the super PAC, in return for his consulting services between April 2011 and November 2012.

But the recently filed Form 990 of Priorities USA, the nonprofit, shows that it, too, has been paying Begala handsomely. In the first eight months of the 501(c)(4)’s existence, Begala received more than $184,000 for “communications consulting,” making him Priorities’ top independent contractor.

According to Burton, this investment paid off for Priorities. “As one of the preeminent Democratic strategists in the country,” Burton told OpenSecrets Blog, “his leadership, strategic vision, and fundraising ability made much of our work possible.”

Begala — who writes for Newsweek & The Daily Beast, while also serving as a frequent guest and former host on CNN — is one of a group of media figures who double as top-dollar political consultants and operatives. As with media commentators such as Dick Morris and Karl Rove, Begala’s links to the organizations that pay him are not always made clear when he offers his expert opinion on the air or in print. For example, one of the only three videos Priorities USA ever posted on its YouTube page was a clip of Paul Begala on CNN lauding President Obama for standing up for the middle class. Begala’s credentials are displayed on the left, but there is no mention of his links to the pro-Obama group.

Only the beginning

Priorities USA’s activities in the 2012 election are mostly unknown. It didn’t report any independent expenditures to the FEC during the election cycle. And even basics such as how much the group took in and spent won’t be publicly available until much later this year. Tax law gives each 501(c)(4) group 11 months from the end of its fiscal year (including extensions that are virtually automatic) to file its return.

That would put Priorities’ next filing date in late 2013 — more than a year after the election and long after Obama’s inauguration to serve a second term.

Burton would not offer any detail other than to confirm that the group has been active “in 2011, 2012 and 2013.”

“We will provide more information about our efforts in 2012 in our next filing,” wrote Burton.

“It is important to note that we view the system as broken,” he wrote. “But until it changes, we’re going to make sure that there is a countervailing force to the efforts of the likes of Karl Rove and the Koch brothers,” Burton asserted, naming two of the most powerful names involved in shadow money on the Republican side.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/01/obamas-shadow-money-allie/feed/0Restore Our Future’s Eleventh-Hour Bingehttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/12/restore-our-futures-eleventh-hour-b/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/12/restore-our-futures-eleventh-hour-b/#respondThu, 06 Dec 2012 19:08:00 +0000The pro-Mitt Romney super PAC took in more than $22 million and paid out more than $45 million in the days before the election.

]]>The pro-Mitt Romney super PAC Restore Our Future raked in $22 million in the weeks between Oct. 18 and Nov. 6, the date of the election, according to the group’s latest filing with the Federal Election Commission.

And its outlays were even more eye-popping: More than $45 million, almost all of it for ads. All told, Restore Our Future spent more than $142 million in independent expenditures in the race, more than half of it against President Barack Obama and the rest against his Republican rivals for the nomination.

The last-minute donors to the super PAC included Miriam and Sheldon Adelson, who gave $10 million to help Romney’s losing presidential effort. That brought the Adelsons’ total investment in Restore to $30 million for the election cycle.

No other contributors even came close, although there were several other $1 million-plus gifts: Larry Ellison, Oracle‘s CEO, sent $3 million; Houston Texans chair Robert McNair chipped in $1 million; and the holding company Renco Group, which has mining and other subsidiaries, also gave $1 million.

This was the second $1 million gift from Renco to Restore Our Future; the first was in July. Billionaire Ira Rennert heads the company, which has often run into trouble with environmental regulators; that’s especially true of Renco’s Doe Run lead smelting business. Rennert and his wife, Ingeborg, are frequent Republican donors, giving to state and federal party committees as well as to candidates.

McNair, too, previously gave Restore Our Future a $1 million check. Earlier on, he supported some of Romney’s rivals: Herman Cain and Rick Perry, through the pro-Perry super PAC Make Us Great Again. McNair also invested heavily in the Texas Conservatives Fund, which backed an established GOP candidate, David Dewhurst, against tea party-supported Ted Cruz in the Republican nomination fight for a Texas Senate seat. Cruz won.

Ellison, on the other hand, has given to a mix of Republicans and Democrats, including Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), but his big money has been reserved for Republican Party committees. He also maxed out to Romney.

All super PACs must file their post-election reports by midnight tonight.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/12/restore-our-futures-eleventh-hour-b/feed/0OpenSecrets PolitiQuizz: Outside Spending’s Upward Trendhttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/11/opensecrets-politiquizz-outside-spe/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/11/opensecrets-politiquizz-outside-spe/#respondMon, 19 Nov 2012 13:08:06 +0000This election cycle, outside groups spent more money than in any previous election, totaling almost $1.3 billion. Prior to the 2012 election, which cycle in the last 20 years had the largest increase in outside spending compared to the previous elections?

]]>This election cycle, outside groups spent more money than in any previous election, totaling almost $1.3 billion — and super PACs are responsible for about 50 percent of that. In addition to party committees, conservative super PACs American Crossroads and Restore Our Future and liberal super PAC Priorities USA Action were three of the major players in this election’s outside spending, dropping hundreds of millions of dollars on independent expenditures.

From the 2008 election to the 2012 election, there was a $702 million increase in outside spending, while this year’s election was an $808 million increase from the 2010 midterm election.

For the Politiquizz this week, we’re asking:

Prior to the 2012 election, which cycle in the last 20 years had the largest increase in outside spending compared to the previous elections? Additionally, what are the differences between that cycle and the previous midterm election as well as that cycle and the previous presidential election? (Round to the nearest million-dollar.)

The first person to answer correctly in the comments section of this page will win a free copy of The Blue Pages: Second Edition, the money-in-politics book for which the Center for Responsive Politics provided data and analysis. The answer can be found somewhere on OpenSecrets.org.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/11/opensecrets-politiquizz-outside-spe/feed/0Nonprofits, Shell Corporations Help Shield Identity of Ad Backershttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/secret-money/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/secret-money/#respondTue, 30 Oct 2012 18:01:57 +0000In the 2012 election, nonprofits have been the preferred vehicle for donors who prefer to keep their identities secret. But with the right lawyers, super PACs, which are supposedly transparent about their donors, can accomplish the same feat.

In the 2012 election, nonprofits have been the preferred vehicle for donors who prefer to keep their identities secret. But with the right lawyers, super PACs, which are supposedly transparent about their donors, can accomplish the same feat.

Social welfare nonprofits, known as 501(c)(4)s by the Internal Revenue Service, file tax returns with the IRS. The names of their top donors are revealed to the IRS — but not to the public.

Super PACs, on the other hand, do report their donors. In some instances, though, those donors are nonprofits. Or the funds might come from shell corporations, which have passed through millions of dollars to the political organizations from unidentified donors in this election.

Aetna’s oops

Occasionally, the veil is lifted on the secrecy of these groups, sometimes inadvertantly.Insurance giant Aetna accidentally disclosed earlier this year to insurance regulators that it had contributed $3 million to the American Action Network, a 501(c)(4) group that has spent $11 million targeting mostly Democratic candidates for Congress.

Aetna also has a corporate political action committee, which is funded by employees and limited in what it can take in and spend. It has spent $2.6 million in the last three cycles combined, a fraction of what is spent by the PACs of other insurance giants.

Last week, the New American Energy Opportunity Foundation, a 501(c)(4) group led by two executives at an oil and gas company, revealed it had paid for nearly $800,000 in radio ads targeting President Barack Obama on his energy policy and the funds came thanks to a donation from Las Vegas casino titan Sheldon Adelson.

Adelson and his family have given more than $53 million to super PACs this election.Shell corporations

Not all secret money comes from nonprofits.

On Sept. 26, a corporation was formed in Knoxville, Tenn., with the most mundane of names: Specialty Group, Inc. On its registration paperwork, one name was listed, that of attorney William S. Rose Jr. The address provided was a home owned by Rose.

Specialty sent several checks totaling $5.2 million to FreedomWorks for America, a super PAC affiliated with the tea party network and with former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey.

The donations make Specialty Group the sixth-largest organization contributing money to super PACs, and only a handful of individuals have contributed more.

Rose could not be reached for comment and all listed phone numbers have been disconnected.

Specialty Group, Inc., isn’t the first apparent shell corporation–a company with no known physical presence, product or staff–to throw cash into the post-Citizens United campaign finance arena.

In 2011, two other shell companies, one called Eli Publishing and the other called F8 LLC, both incorporated at the same address in an office building in downtown Provo, Utah, contributed $1 million to Restore Our Future, the super PAC backing Mitt Romney.

The suite number given for both corporations doesn’t actually exist, and there is no office, but the registered agents for both companies had connections to Nu Skin, a multi-level marketing cosmetic company founded by conservative Utah resident Steve Lund.

No official confirmation has ever been made, however, and Lund and his wife have gone on to contribute a combined $1 million, in their own names, to Restore Our Future.

The extended money trail

Taking money from hard to track shell corporations isn’t the only way for a super PAC to skirt disclosure rules.

Another common tactic is for a nonprofit to give money to a super PAC. This happens frequently when a nonprofit is closely affiliated with the super PAC it is giving money to.In total, Center for Responsive Politics data shows that 501(c)(4) groups contributed at least $10 million to 46 different super PACs.

Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind.’s failed bid for re-election stopped at the primary when he lost to Richard Mourdock, his tea party affiliated opponent. His loss wasn’t for lack of trying by a group called Indiana Values Super PAC, which spent $459,000 to defeat Mourdock. The super PAC received $137,000 of its funds from a 501(c)(4) group also called Indiana Values, based out of the office of a lobbying firm on K Street in Washington, D.C., where the money trail ends.

At least $165,000 of that money came from another super PAC, called Fight for the Dream, based out of a post office box at a UPS Store in Allentown. Fight for the Dream in turn got all of its money from a nonprofit called Restore the Dream, based out of the very same post office box.

Organizers told the Center for Responsive Politics that the group was designed with the help of their legal counsel, a lawyer named Anthony Ferate. Ferate is also an in-house lobbyist for natural gas company Devon Energy.

He denied there was anything improper about the setup, and said in an interview with CRP that it is a widespread practice.

“This was set up within federal election laws,” he said. “I would disagree that there’s anything to question about transfers between super PACS. In fact, the Democrats are coordinating between their super PACs.”

(Update, Nov. 2: Ferate said he is no longer involved with the groups.)

According to a CRP analysis, the super PAC that is the single largest recipient of cash from a nonprofit is FreedomWorks For America, the same super PAC that received $5.2 million from the Tennessee shell corporation.

CRP data shows the group received $2.3 million from its own nonprofit, FreedomWorks. That means that although the group has disclosed $15.4 million in donations, but $7.5 million of it has been untraceable.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/secret-money/feed/0Capital Eye Opener, Oct. 26: Passing $1 Billion in Outside Spending, Pro-Gingrich Group’s Apocalyptic Ad, and Morehttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/capital-eye-opener-oct-26/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/capital-eye-opener-oct-26/#respondFri, 26 Oct 2012 11:49:00 +0000More than $1 billion has been spent by outside groups in this election cycle, and meanwhile candidates, parties and super PACs all cleaned up in the first 17 days of October. Also, the pro-Gingrich super PAC Winning Our Future makes its first expenditure in months, producing a dark vision of four more years of Obama.

LATEST MONEY GAME RESULTS: Pre-election campaign finance reports covering the first 17 days of this month, due by midnight yesterday, show both presidential campaigns have stuffed their pockets with cash and are well prepared for the final push — as are their main allies in the super PAC world. According to OpenSecrets.org data, super PACs and other outside groups have spent $1 billion this cycle.

In filings made with the FEC late last night, President Barack Obama‘s campaign reported raising $77.2 million, a hefty number, and ended the reporting period with $93 million in cash on hand. Republican candidate Mitt Romney‘s campaign raised $51.8 million and ended the period with $52.7 million in cash on hand. The Republican National Committee, which raised $19.8 million in the first part of October, also reported having $67.5 million in cash on hand, a significant advantage in terms of available cash for the Republicans, because the Democratic National Committee only reported having $10.3 million in available cash after raising $14.8 millon.

But the final battle won’t be fought by the two main candidates and their parties alone — super PACs and outside spending groups on both sides of the aisle are apparently well-stocked with ammunition and have shown no sign of letting up their assault. In fact, last night, the combined expenditures of super PACs, shadow money organizations and party committees — together known as outside spending groups — crested the $1 billion spending mark, according to OpenSecrets.org analysis of the data.

Restore Our Future, the super PAC that backs Romney, raised money at a pace of more than $1 million a day — $20.2 million during that 17 day period — and spent $12 million on independent expenditures. Priorities USA Action, the super PAC backing Obama, collected a more modest $13 million and spent $9.4 million on IEs. American Crossroads, the conservative super PAC run by Karl Rove, raised $11.7 million in the first part of October, but used its cash reserves to spend much bigger — $33.1 million on independent expenditures alone.

Other major super PACs had a great two-and-a-half weeks as well: Majority PAC, the super PAC supporting Senate Democrats, raised $9.9 million, and House Majority PAC picked up $6.7 million — both amounts totaling more than 25 percent of each group’s total fundraising for the election cycle, in just 17 days.

The Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC supporting Republican congressional candidates, picked up $2.5 million from Chevron — a very large sum even in the rarefied world of super PAC donors, and the largest donation so far by a publicly traded corporation. It made up the bulk of the super PAC’s $3.1 million total funds raised.

– Russ Choma

PRO-GINGRICH SUPER PAC POSTS APOCALYPTIC PRO-ROMNEY AD: Winning Our Future, the super PAC that supported Newt Gingrich for President, released its first political ad since February yesterday.

The ad, titled “The American Decline,” dramatically depicts the group’s vision of what the world would look like under the next four years of an Obama presidency: rioting, churches turned into mosques, Christianity ripped from the public sphere, a nuclear Iran and sky-high gas prices, not to mention a lot of darkness and blood. The ad urges viewers to vote for Mitt Romney.

Somehow the super PAC spent just $5,000 getting the ad, which runs nearly three minutes long, made. It’s the first independent expenditure the super PAC has made since March 1, as well as its first to do anything other than support Gingrich.

The super PAC still has more than $2,000 cash on hand, according to its most recent filing.A person who answered the phone at Winning Our Future’s office hung up — twice — when asked for comment.

But if that isn’t enough of a challenge, Rivera is being charged with 11 counts of violating state ethics laws while he served as a state lawmaker, after the Florida Commission on Ethics found probable cause against him.

Below is an ad by Garcia attacking Rivera for his ethical issues:

According to documents released by the commission, Rivera’s charges include misusing campaign funds for non-campaign related expenditures, failing to report income from outside sources and receiving income from Southwest Florida Enterprises, Inc. to influence his vote and/or actions within the legislature.

Rivera — who served in Florida’s House of Representatives for eight years prior to winning a congressional seat — also is accused of having a contractual relationship with Southwest Florida Enterprises that “would create a continuing or frequently recurring conflict between [his] private interests and the performance of his duties” as a lawmaker.

Not only did he deny guilt of all the civil charges, but he accused opponent Garcia — a former official in the Department of Energy under President Barack Obama who ran against Rivera in the 2010 election — of being a force behind the commissions’ efforts with less than two weeks until the election.

“These allegations are false and will be dismissed shortly,” Rivera said in a statement released by his campaign. “It is unfortunate that the Florida Ethics Commission deliberately chose to play politics by injecting itself into the middle of an election after voting has started.”Separately, Rivera is also under federal investigation for tax violations, according to The Associated Press.

COINCIDENCE OR POLITICAL PLOY? Film producer Harvey Weinstein is receiving criticism for his latest film production, and this time, it has nothing to do with Michael Moore.

The New York Times reports that Weinstein’s film “SEAL Team Six: The Raid on Osama bin Laden” is claimed to be a political stunt set to premier on the National Geographic Channel on Nov. 4, just two days before voters decide between President Barack Obama and GOP challenger Mitt Romney.

Weinstein, a vocal supporter of the president, and the film’s director, John Stockwell, recently added news and documentary footage to enhance Obama’s role in the film for the sake of “realism,” rather than what has been called propaganda.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/capital-eye-opener-oct-26/feed/0FreedomWorks Small Donor Strategy Works in Septemberhttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/freedomworks-strategy-worked-in-sep/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/freedomworks-strategy-worked-in-sep/#respondWed, 24 Oct 2012 16:50:00 +0000A conservative super PAC with an extraordinarily large small-donor base had its best month yet and has roared into October.

The group, a conservative super PAC with tea party roots, is an anomaly among super PACs in its emphasis on small-donor funding. In September, unitemized contributions, or those of $200 or less, made up 47 percent of contributions to the super PAC, exceeding its 35 percent average for the year.

Even larger contributions to the group were relatively small in September. There were many $250 donations and only five contributions of $10,000 or more that didn’t come from a FreedomWorks affiliate. The largest donation, $750,000, came from Mary Stiefel, a retiree from Pinecrest, Florida. This was her first contribution of the year, although she gave the group $5,000 in 2010 and has contributed to seven 2012 campaigns across the country.

Yet even without contributions from the Sheldon Adelsons and Bob Perrys of the super PAC world, FreedomWorks for America managed to raise about $3 million last month and spent about $4 million.

FreedomWorks spokesman Adam Brandon says that part of the group’s strategy is to expand a network of supporters that totaled 45,000 people last year.

“Small donors tend to be very stable. They become part of the community,” Brandon said. “What ends up happening with these small donors is not only do they donate but they also volunteer…We are building a machine that on the day after the election is stronger than the day before.”

FreedomWorks’ network of small donors is all the more impressive when compared to other major super PACs’ fundraising statistics. As the table below shows, none of the other active super PACs raising as much or more money this election cycle comes close to having as large a share of funds from unitemized contributions. (Super PACs connected to labor unions are not included because they are in large part fueled by members’ dues, which are difficult to compare to individual donations to other super PACs.)

Freedomworks for America is involved in races across the country. It spent more than $1 million in support of tea party firebrand Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) in September. It also spent nearly as much backing senatorial candidate Connie Mack (R-Fla.).

The super PAC raised about $1 million in August, its second-best month. Throughout the rest of the year, FreedomWorks for America gained less than $500,000 monthly.

More money has clearly found its way to the group in October — a lot more. Although it had only $700,000 in cash on hand coming into the month, since Oct. 1, Freedomworks for America has reported spending $4.8 million, the greatest amounts of it in the Florida, Indiana, Arizona and Ohio Senate races. By Friday, when groups will have filed pre-general election reports with the Federal Election Commission, it will be clear whether the group is still drawing from its strong small donor base for these funds.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/freedomworks-strategy-worked-in-sep/feed/0Priorities USA Gains Edge With Help Of New Donorshttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/priorities-usa-gains-edge-with-help-of-new-donors/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/priorities-usa-gains-edge-with-help-of-new-donors/#respondSun, 21 Oct 2012 18:22:42 +0000Priorities USA, the super PAC backing President Barack Obama, scored another win last month in the head-to-head matchup against its counterpart -- and did it by attracting many more new donors, most of them wealthy individuals.

Restore Our Future, which backs GOP nominee Mitt Romney, towers over all other super PACs in terms of cash raised — $111.4 million since it was formed last year — but for the past two months, Priorities USA has bested it. In September, Priorities raised $15.2 million, while Restore Our Future picked up $14.8 million.

Comparing the two groups’ donors, it’s clear that while both turn to traditional demographics — unions for the Democrats and big business for the Republican side — the real fundraising might comes from extremely wealthy individuals who write enormous checks. Overall, Priorities received about 85 percent of its money for the month from individuals — $13 million from 716 such donors. Restore Our Future relied on individuals for about 79 percent of its cash — $10.9 million from 215 individuals.

While hundreds of individuals donated money to the major presidential super PACs, the reality is each group’s top 20 donors (including organizations) accounted for the vast majority of its cash. Priorities received about 85 percent of its money from its top 20 list, while Restore took in about 70 percent from its top 20.

The biggest source of cash from an organization for Priorities was the UAW Education Fund, which gave $1 million. In total, unions gave $1.8 million to Priorities. On the other side, the single biggest contribution from an organization to Restore Our Future was $1 million from the Oxbow Corporation, which is owned by Bill Koch.

However, Priorities USA Action had more new big donors (those in the top 20) than Restore Our Future (see chart at right), perhaps indicating that the tightness of the race led more Democrats to set aside their objections to super PACs. From its top 20 list alone, Priorities picked up $8.5 million from new donors, or 55 percent of its total take, while new big donors on Restore’s top 20 list gave just $4.1 million, or about 27 percent of that group’s total sum for the month.

The biggest givers to both super PACs, however, were the usual suspects — wealthy individuals who have long supported the particular candidates. As we wrote Friday, the single largest donation for Restore Our Future came from Bob Perry, the Texas construction magnate who has now given the super PAC $9 million. On the Democratic side, Chicago media mogul Fred Eychaner (his company, Newsweb, owns a number of radio stations) gave $2 million. Eychaner had previously given Priorities USA Action $1.5 million, and has been a prominent supporter and bundler for Obama.

Close on Eychaner’s heels is James Simons, who gave $1.5 million to Priorities USA Action in September, bringing his overall total for the super PAC to $3.5 million. Simons appears determined to singlehandedly refute the idea that money from top Wall Street executives and hedge fund managers favors Republican causes this year (a notion for which there’s very strong evidence). Simons is the chairman of Renaissance Technologies, one of the biggest and most successful hedge funds (Forbes estimates that Simons took home $2.1 billion in pay last year). The current CEO of Renaissance, Robert Mercer (Forbes writes that he took home only $125 million in 2011) is one of the biggest and most prolific check writers supporting conservative super PACs.

Another name on the list of Priorities USA Action’s supporters that seems to defy conventional wisdom is Samuel R. Walton, who gave the Obama-backing super PAC $300,000 in September. As we’ve documented before, the Walton family, one of the richest in the country, has overwhelmingly backed Republican candidates and causes in the past, but the grandson of Walmart’s founder is making his own way. Steven Spielberg and Jeffery Katzenberg (one of the most prominent supporters of Obama) each gave $1 million. David Boies, the super-lawyer who represented the government against Microsoft in the 1990s, Al Gore against George W. Bush in 2000 and the forces fighting anti-gay marriage Proposition 8 in California, also gave $1 million.

Restore Our Future had its own prominent scion of a great American fortune. August Busch III — whose great-grandfather founded Anheuser-Busch — gave the group $250,000. He was joined on the list of new big donors to Restore Our Future by another household name — at least in Texas on Sunday afternoons: Robert McNair, the owner of the Houston Texans, gave $1 million.

]]>https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/priorities-usa-gains-edge-with-help-of-new-donors/feed/0Restore Our Future Posts Second-Largest Haul in Septemberhttps://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/restore-our-future-posts-second-largest-haul/
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/restore-our-future-posts-second-largest-haul/#respondFri, 19 Oct 2012 20:53:46 +0000Restore Our Future's haul for September was nearly $15 million, its second-best month of the cycle. Helping it along were some of the usual billionaires.

Many of the usual conservative bankrollers came out to support the PAC. Bob Perry, the owner of Perry Homes and a principal funder of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group that helped bring down Democrat John Kerry‘s 2004 presidential bid, gave the super PAC $2 million this month, bringing his total support to $9 million.

Conservative billionaire Bill Koch gave $1 million through Oxbow Carbon, a Florida-based coal services company of which he is the founder and CEO.

The coal industry has been none too happy with President Obama. In addition to the contribution from Oxbow, Joseph Craft III, the president of Alliance Coal, fired $500,000 off to the pro-Romney super PAC.

Within the 279 transactions, there were seven energy companies based out of the same address in Missouri that donated a combined total of $150,000 to Restore Our Future.

All donated $20,000 with the exceptions of Raven Energy and SITran, which gave $25,000 each.

While Raven Energy is an affiliated company, Foresight Energy — which develops, mines, transports and sells coal mined in Illinois — owned the remaining companies as of December, 2011 as the result of a company reorganization of its reporting entities.

A first-time donor to Restore Our Future, Robert McNair, the majority owner of the Houston Texans football team, chipped in with $1 millon. According to Forbes, he’s worth $1.8 billion, and made his fortune selling power plant Cogen to Enron; he still has stakes in other power plants.

McNair gave $25,000 to Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker to help him fight a recall effort in June, but his only other super PAC donation was a $100,000 gift to Make Us Great Again, the outside spending group that supported Texas GOP Gov. Rick Perry in his presidential bid this cycle.

Stanley Herzog, the CEO and founder of Herzog Contracting Corp. in Missouri, was another first-time donor giving $1 million.

The $14.8 million haul was the second-biggest monthly sum for the super PAC (in June it took in more than $20 million). And while the group didn’t spend much last month, it has been writing checks at a much faster clip in October.